- From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
- Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 16:01:15 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Following are proposed rationales for checkpoints of revised ATAG2.0 per my action item from Authoring Tools WG telecon of May 2. Comments welcome. Thanks and best wishes Tim Boland NIST PS - I send regrets for the Authoring Tools telecon of May 9 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- A.1.1 Rationale: People who have difficulty perceiving non-text content in the authoring interface can have text in text alternatives for such non-text content made available to them (by assistive technology or braille, for example) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A.1.2 Rationale: People who have difficulty accessing or interpreting multimedia- supported information in the authoring interface can have the information made available to them by other means. For example, people who are deaf or have a hearing loss can access auditory information through captions, and people who are blind or have low vision, as well as those with cognitive disabilities, who have difficulty interpreting visually what is happening, can receive audio descriptions of visual information. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A.2.4 Rationale: Users with photosensitive epilepsy can void having seizures triggered by flashing or by spatial patterns. Techniques: refer to WCAG resources? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A.3.4 Rationale: While intuitive authoring interface design is valuable to many users, some users may still not be able to understand or be able to operate the native authoring interface without thorough documentation. For instance, a user with blindness may not find a graphical authoring interface intuitive without supporting documentation. Techniques: refer to UAAG resources?
Received on Thursday, 5 May 2005 20:02:40 UTC